1,596 karma · joined April 4, 2017
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/jrimbault; my proof: https://keybase.io/jrimbault/sigs/YStRMnahTqv-NqG4y2N0krmu7X--H4cModprRVH05J8 ]
I'm extremely biased coming from a family with a long tradition of atheism and even anticlerical "militantism".
The discourse around Mathematica, educational software, and video games has changed a lot in 20 years. I've the whole thing, not much is particularly relevent. Wolfram asks simply too much per license to be widely used in primary and secondary education.
There's also this website https://programminghistorian.org/
I don't have a hate/love opinion on most things. I may have an opinion on wether or not one particular technical choice is contextually a good or bad idea. I may not be able to form an opinion.
// assuming `numbers` is an iterator
numbers.any(|i| i % 2 == 1)
Rust's iterators generally compile down very well, and I think this exactly as expressive as Python. And I also wished C#'s Enumerable were as performant as Rust's iterators.Very Debatable, capital D. Maybe in the US, but even there you have things like NPR and publicly funded libraries which are not seen as "bad things" as far as I can tell.
Except for those city house cats who are terrified of anything moving. I know one city house cat who's a real hunter killer and is able to actually lure, trap and kill pigeons from inside an appartment (without balcony), and when outside in the countryside kills absolutely everything.
But most city house cats I know are scared shitless of rodents and birds. My own cat is frequently "bullied" by ravens.
Someone I know uses a iPad Pro, 13" seems like a good size to get the approximate good size. But it's also very expensive for just diplaying partitions.
# where a and b are functions
FOO = { a.__name__: a, b.__name__: b }
and with argparse do parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument(
"-f",
"--foo",
choices=FOO.keys(),
default=next(iter(FOO)),
help="choose your type of foo",
)Assorted musing : Rust, OCaml under C disguise.
Funny mind thing to forget to increment counters each year.
> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
That's why I answered to one comment but not to the other. It's really sterile ground for an argument. Which I'd hoped that by carefully wording my first comment we could all avoid.
Between your answer and MaxBarraclough's, one is tonally a quickwitted mean quip and the other is a well articulated and well meaning response.
And yes there are exceptions, that's why my comment had so many rhetorical devices to defuse those silly arguments. My comment is specifically about "booleans and two behaviors" and even then I don't affirm it as the only valid way, only as my opinion and not in all cases.